Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Shankar Ramdas Vs. Emperor

Shankar Ramdas vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Decided Aug 26, 1915
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/344050

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 370(i) - Duty of Presidency Magistrate to give reasons for convicting accused-Reasons not given-Judgment, effect of. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Shankar Ramdas

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1915Bom137(1); 31Ind.Cas.371

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 370(i) - duty of presidency magistrate to give reasons for convicting accused-reasons not given-judgment, effect of. - 1. this is an appeal from a judgment of the learned chief presidency magistrate who convicted the accused, shankar, ramdas under section 451 of the indian penal code and, the accused having admitted certain previous convictions, passed a sentence of eighteen months' rigorous imprisonment.2. we were compelled to call for the record and proceedings, as the learned magistrate's judgment did not disclose to us any reasons why the evidence for the prosecution was accepted as sufficient. while we certainly have, no wish to impose upon the presidency magistrate any further burden than is imposed by the express terms of the criminal procedure code, we think his attention should be drawn to the requirements of clause (i) of section 370 of the code and to the decision in natabar ghose v. provash chandra chatterjee 27 c. 461 : 4 c.w.n. 467 with which we agree. in the present case the learned presidency magistrate has written only: 'i convict the accused. i believe the evidence of the complainant and the witnesses for the prosecution.' that belief, however, is necessarily implied in the fact that the learned magistrate convicted the accused. and in our opinion clause (i) of section 370 requires that there should be a statement of the reasons which induced the learned magistrate to believe the evidence for the prosecution.3. the appeal is dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate who convicted the accused, Shankar, Ramdas under Section 451 of the Indian Penal Code and, the accused having admitted certain previous convictions, passed a sentence of eighteen months' rigorous imprisonment.

2. We were compelled to call for the record and proceedings, as the learned Magistrate's judgment did not disclose to us any reasons why the evidence for the prosecution was accepted as sufficient. While we certainly have, no wish to impose upon the Presidency Magistrate any further burden than is imposed by the express terms of the Criminal Procedure Code, we think his attention should be drawn to the requirements of Clause (i) of Section 370 of the Code and to the decision in Natabar Ghose v. Provash Chandra Chatterjee 27 C. 461 : 4 C.W.N. 467 with which we agree. In the present case the learned Presidency Magistrate has written only: 'I convict the accused. I believe the evidence of the complainant and the witnesses for the prosecution.' That belief, however, is necessarily implied in the fact that the learned Magistrate convicted the accused. And in our opinion Clause (i) of Section 370 requires that there should be a statement of the reasons which induced the learned Magistrate to believe the evidence for the prosecution.

3. The appeal is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial